His game was predicated on getting past his man, drawing a double and kicking. If the double didn't come, he proved to be more than capable of drawing the foul and finishing. And he did most of this within the structure of an offense. In today's league that is based on floor spacing and creating driving lanes, would he have outright dominated the competition and had a much different legacy? Is he a victim of being born a decade too soon?

dk7th wrote:he took too many shots for a point guard and he was a terrible defender. can't be king if you aren't a two-way player.

Too many shots for a point guard? What you think of Damien Lillard? Steph curry? Russell Westbrook?

mreinman wrote:

EnySpree wrote:

dk7th wrote:he took too many shots for a point guard and he was a terrible defender. can't be king if you aren't a two-way player.

Too many spots for a point guard? What you think of Damien Lillard? Steph curry? Russell Westbrook?

no such thing as too many shots if you are hitting at a high rate.

marbury didn't. westbrook doesn't. lillard too early to tell.

dk7th wrote:

mreinman wrote:

EnySpree wrote:

dk7th wrote:he took too many shots for a point guard and he was a terrible defender. can't be king if you aren't a two-way player.

Too many spots for a point guard? What you think of Damien Lillard? Steph curry? Russell Westbrook?

no such thing as too many shots if you are hitting at a high rate.

marbury didn't. westbrook doesn't. lillard too early to tell.

I actually think Marbury was more of a pass first point guard than anyone mentioned. He only looked to score if he had to. He was a breakdown and kick point guard. He took over games when he had to. Never was like Westbrook. Marbs could actually run a team.

His problem was he was crazy....possibly a little slow. Highly confident and brash. He's also had alot of bad luck. He broke kmarts leg in practice by accident. That nets team had horrible injuries. That was the first real time he liked to score first. In Phoenix they were injury prone too. That's how they ended up drafting Amare.

Also Isiah totally screwed up the Knicks by giving up on frank williams sending the kid on a downward spiral. Then he got rid of Keith van horn and doleac. That team actually played very well together. Compound that with the craziness going on during the Isiah years. Just insane bad luck and horrible choices.

All that and it still doesn't take away from what he actually could do on the court. You gotta give Credit for his game. All the other factors is what tainted his career

EnySpree wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Marbury's also had a gift for alienating teammates. That's bad news in any era. I saw that piece on him a few days ago and Marbury looks genuinely at peace, I'm happy for him. Who wouldn't be in that situation? He's come a long way.

That was his downfall. He did it everywhere. First one was in Minnesota. He had a good thing going on and forced a trade. He was an ******* but he brought it.

It's a team game.

Knicks1969 wrote:Mental or not, Marbury was a hell of a PG.

you just pulled a real juice card there.

SupremeCommander wrote:I don't think you can put his mental stability aside...

no, he was too weak mentally to make the most of his gifts. He still would have had to grow up. I mean, this is a guy who walked away from KG because he wanted to be THE man. Those two could have been lethal...

there was a book published in 2004 called "The Last Shot" by someone named darcy frey. it was a fascinating look at marbury and his family, and the author insinuates some damning things about marbury's father. nothing explicit, mind you, as that may have brought about a lawsuit. but still, the readers will glean plenty....